201 optimizing land use, planning at the regional level, managing risks, and involving communities, but not how to regulate these objectives through law. The absence of legally constituted decision-making creates a gap that technical planning cannot fill. This diagnosis, based on the comparative analysis summarized in Table 2, lays the foundation for the results presented below, with the guiding principle that post-mining should be rethought as a matter of legal governance of the territories where mining activity took place (or is taking place). 4. EMPIRICAL AND COMPARATIVE RESULTS 4.1 Empirical results identified in the international literature Result 1: Mine closure continues to be regulated as a technical-financial event rather than a territorial transition: Closure plans prioritize regulatory compliance, financial guarantees, and post-closure verification, with subsequent uses appearing as ancillary elements rather than the central focus of regulation. In Peru, the LCM reproduces this approach, as its main purpose is to prevent and control risks arising from the cessation of operations, without configuring closure as a process of post-mining territorial governance understood as a long-term socio-ecological system. Result 2: Effective post-mining planning must occur before closure begins: Studies on regional, landscape, and post-mining transition planning agree that the most sustainable results are achieved when: (i) the definition of post-mining uses is incorporated from the operational phase, and (ii) there is coordination with land use and regional planning instruments (Cooper, 2024; Hood et al., 2025; Sina Amirshenava et al., 2022). This confirms that post-mining governance cannot be reactive and requires regulatory anticipation, temporal continuity, and institutional coherence. In Peru, neither the LCM nor its regulations require advance post-closure land use planning. Although progressive closure is recognized, it operates as an environmental management tool rather than an instrument of land use transition. Result 3: Regulatory fragmentation creates gaps in responsibility and governance: Comparative literature identifies that the greatest social, environmental, and territorial risks emerge when there are parallel regulatory regimes for closure and remediation (Tiemann, 2022; Daly et al., 2025). Historical environmental liabilities tend to be disconnected from territorial planning systems, running the risk of creating territories orphaned from post-extractive governance, where there is no clarity about future responsibilities. In Peru, regulatory fragmentation is clear: the express exclusion of PAMs from the scope of the LCM and its regulations (Article 2 of D.S. 033-2005-EM) institutionalizes this fragmentation, legally separating the closure of active mining units from the territorial treatment of PAMs, which are regulated by the LPAM and its regulations. Result 4: Regulatory weakness about the social and cultural dimension: Studies on environmental justice, community participation, and the social dimension of closure show that participation is often consultative, late, and non-binding, and that the cultural, identity, or symbolic values of the post-mining territory are not adequately recognized (Demajorovic, 2022;
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTM0Mzk2